0
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Remember kids, there is no such thing as lawfare…
Posted on 11/11/26 at 3:20 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 11/11/26 at 3:20 pm to SlowFlowPro
"What these discussions always devolve into is a discussion about legitimacy.
Perceived illegitimate actions = lawfare
Perceived legitimate actions = not lawfare
And that legitimacy is almost always built around the team concept"
Agreed. That is why I don't favor legitimacy--which can be the ends justifying the means--as part of defining what lawfare is. It doesn't make the real world problem go away, but it does help shed light on who is practicing lawfare. If you can't identify the potential crime before the investigation, it's probably lawfare.
Perceived illegitimate actions = lawfare
Perceived legitimate actions = not lawfare
And that legitimacy is almost always built around the team concept"
Agreed. That is why I don't favor legitimacy--which can be the ends justifying the means--as part of defining what lawfare is. It doesn't make the real world problem go away, but it does help shed light on who is practicing lawfare. If you can't identify the potential crime before the investigation, it's probably lawfare.
Posted on 11/11/26 at 3:22 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The definition just got 10 feet higher
Definitions
Context
Nuance
When you aren't able to defend one of your stupid positions, you always resort to ridiculous word salad stunts.
You know what I find to be ultimately ironic? You're virtually the only poster here who claims to not know what lawfare is, yet you're a lawyer.
Posted on 11/11/26 at 3:24 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You say this quoting an argument built on a lie
Look at your dishonesty in action
Posted on 11/11/26 at 3:36 pm to djsdawg
quote:
Look at your dishonesty in action
You're tripling down now
I've never argued lawfare didn't exist. That's a lie. You quoted an argument based on this lie and then said I'm a dishonest person. When I pointed this out, which is a specifically honest commentary, you claim that honesty is "dishonesty in action"
You live in a bizarro world
Posted on 11/11/26 at 3:48 pm to SlowFlowPro
Fnding real wrongdoing wouldn't automatically rule out selective enforcement or abusive methods, but calling an investigation lawfare before you know its grounds or how it's being conducted can have the opposite problem of making any evidence it produces illegitimate in advance. We need an answer to what would distinguish a legit investigation of your own side from a political persecution and then whatever that standard is should also apply when the other side is being investigated.
Posted on 11/11/26 at 4:01 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
Fnding real wrongdoing wouldn't automatically rule out selective enforcement or abusive methods,
Correct.
quote:
or how it's being conducted
Well, we know how they've conducted them in the past.
Posted on 11/11/26 at 4:12 pm to Flats
yeah, past conduct is relevant to how much trust they've earned, but does it justify closer scrutiny of the next investigation or settle its legitimacy before we see the grounds/methods? A good starting point IMO is "is there an investigation of someone on your side that you'd consider legitimate if the evidence/procedures warranted it"? (distrust can raise the burden but that's different from an impossible level of justification)
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News